Legalization and Standardization of Organ Donation

[kryptqnick]

I think it's important to first learn how it's done these days to analyze the proposal. So I decided to read a bit about my country and some others, and here's what I learned: in Spain, there's a presumption of consent to become a donor after death, unless a person explicitly said they were against it. From what I read about the US, it's the opposite, but 54% of citizens sign agreements to become donors. Given that 95% support the idea in the US, I think what this country needs is simply the presumption of consent because it indeed makes sense where the vast majority supports it.
So it's already happening, and there are no financial incentives involved, no 'money upfront' or anything.
In my country, you can register as a potential donor in an event of your death, and there's no financial incentive to do this.
I'm not sure any country would provide a financial incentive for people to register, especially in the US, where 54% already registered.

[Ucy]

A thoroughly encrypted data that only the owner can have access to should be better.

If only the owner can access that data how the hell would that scheme work when both the poeple in need, the insurance company, the company making the connection between those need the data?
You storing some secret code in a blockchain that can't be read by others is useless, others need access to it, once you grant access to anybody else this can lead to leaks.

You think this can be guaranteed on a centralized database? Everyone running a node, controlling his/her private keys and always verifying the integrity of the data on the decentralized network sounds more secure to me.

How can you verify the integrity of the data if the data is not checked to be accurate by somebody?
Unlike transactions in a chain where the origin of your coins is validated when they are minted in a new block how will this data be inserted in the chain? How will nodes verify you are an actual person, you are a citizen of that country, you actually are healthy enough to donate?

And most importantly, if you want to keep your data secret!!!!, how can others validate it?
You realize the contradiction in this?

This doesn't have to be a Blockchain like I said before. You could develop a decentralized system designed for that particular industry and have users control their data and choose who to share it with. It could be done with zero proof knowledge or some other secured means I have outlined before. It's not impossible to do  this without leaks.
In a decentralized system, a data could be verified once, hashed and stored on the network. Any unauthorized changes to the verified data can always render it invalid.
I have discussed several how to securely verify data, have it hashed and use it for authentication purposes on websites.

[stompix]

I have discussed several how to securely verify data, have it hashed and use it for authentication purposes on websites.

No, you haven't discussed anything and you haven't answered the most important question:
How will you insert by yourself data in that database that nobody has access to but at the same time it will be verified?
If you do it like that is just like creating an account on facebook, till nobody askes you to provide information that that person is indeed you that data is totally unreliable, the moment someone verifies it is the moment your details are no longer secret.

It could be done with zero proof knowledge or some other secured means I have outlined before.

No, you haven't outlined anything, you're just writing the same statement without showing one real example of how this will be done. Besides, if the data is encrypted once you insert it, how it will be safer if it's decentralized compared to being centralized?
If you're going to reply do it by answering my question, this is going nowhere with your just reposting the same things over and over.

[beerlover]

Where you said that the organs should be recorded and people should be paid without any form of examination to know their health status or that there shouldn’t be any form of lifestyle restrictions, is that really a good idea? So, what if the person is living a kind of reckless lifestyle that will affect the particular organ that will be needed later on? And maybe when they die, it happens that the organ is no longer in good condition to be used for the transplant, is it not going to be a huge loss for the company and those that needed the organ transplant?

So, do you think that is a good idea, or don’t you think that there should be an examination to know whether the organ is really in good condition before a payment is to be made to the person upfront?

[AicecreaME]

I've had this idea in my head since 2019, what if it was legal in the US for people to get paid to become a donor.
2 years later, I think I've worked out a framework, but unfortunately it looks like I missed the cutoff date for state ballot initiative requests for the 2022 election cycle.

So here's my framework
Adopting a VC style of investment.
-people are paid a set price for the exclusive right per organ.
-they are given the money upfront, no exams needed
-there are no lifestyle restrictions
-the transplant only occurs after you die
-your estate is given equal or more money than you were given upfront
-if the organ is no longer viable, no big deal, just the cost of doing business. Your off the hook.
-if you change your mind, no big deal, pay back the money at 10% interest to remove your name off the list.
-you must be 18 years or older to apply
-you can enroll your children into the program. Same rules apply, money upfront, transplant only happens after death. On their 18th birthday, they are removed from the program, and have the option to re-enroll. If accepted, same rules apply.

The idea here is that there are over 100,000 people in US in need of transplants and not enough donors. Over 8,000 people die annually, with most waiting over 3 years. The longer they wait, the less productive they become, not including all the stress due to uncertainty.
My proposal is would provide cash upfront, work like the typical VC/Crypto model where you diversify and only need a small handful to breakeven.
The exclusive right would be sold to insurance companies or governments, who would pay 3-5x multiples.

Example 1
Jim, 20 years old, male, lives in Denver Colorado.
He sells us the exclusive right to both his kidney's for $500 each upfront.
We then sell the right to XYZ insurance company for $50,000 per kidney.
I'm assuming insurance companies would then sell term life organ policies to cover expenses.

This transaction is beneficial because insurance companies generally have to spend about $25,000 per year for some dialysis treatments which take up 10+ hours per week for the person in need of a transplant. We are filling the demand. And the cost of the transplant surgery wise is often $100-200,000 anyway. But because their policy holder becomes more productive and increased years to live, the insurance company can justify the expense. Plus based on public data, there are 33,244 fatal motor vehicle crashes in the United States in 2019 in which 36,096 deaths occurred. This resulted in 11.0 deaths per 100,000 people and 1.11 deaths per 100 million miles traveled. The fatality rate per 100,000 people ranged from 3.3 in the District of Columbia to 25.4 in Wyoming. Also based on the numbers, it seems that men in the US begin to start dying in their 40's/50's, 10 years earlier than women. I want to avoid culture war issues and really focus on college kids and not the poor, I don't want this being seen as a payday lending scheme.

I'm working on the website now. Will start on the blockchain next month. The goal is to raise money to get this on the ballots of state elections for the 2024 Presidential election cycle. I want to amend the first line of the current law prohibiting the sale of organ donations after death. This is a felony currently. The average signature needed is about 100-300k per state and seems to be a huge undertaking. Do you guy's see the crypto community getting behind this effort either as early investors or joining the waitlist? What do you guys think of the concept overall.


Blockchain
-----------------------
Each transaction will be available in a blockchain. Those in need will know where in line they are, but the public won't know the names of said people, only the public ID's, and transaction codes.
-shows transaction data
--new donor registration, payout, removal, death
--donor recipient moving up in line, currently in surgery, successful transplant
--insurance company, policy sales

I don't really think this is a wise idea.

Foremost, why would you suggest that there's no need for an examination of the organ donor? That alone, is a very risky move, mate. This is very essential most especially if the topic is about healthcare. It is necessary to background check the lifestyle and medical record of a person who is any way a potential donor of an organ. This is to ensure that the health being of the one being transplanted the organ to, wouldn't be compromised the moment the operation would happen. In addition, to ensure the proper functionality of the organ once stored and used the moment someone already needs it.

Secondly, I think your the concept is just twisted. Organ donation is legal in most countries. What illegal is, is to sell it in exchange of money. In this topic, the idea of organ trafficking is included as well as the selling of organs due to poverty. This will just make more problems instead of filling in and being a solution to a medical problem. If ever this would be legalized, people who think there's no more other way to generate money would just resort to impulsively and carelessly selling their organs in exchange for ample amount of money. And then you will sell it at a higher price to the insurance company. This sounds like a great capitalistic mindset that basically abuses the poor and marginalized. This would just profit the insurance company and the midman, and would left the organ seller at the losing end. Despite saying that this would be voluntary, this is still abusive and just pure greedy. Because as you know, anyone who is desperate would do any measure they know to survive, most especially now wherein life is harder and more challenging than ever.

Lastly, what would be the specific role of blockchain technology in this? What you just mentioned in the post seems like black market to me. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it really appeals to be just those listed in black market where you would buy an organ and everyone is anonymous, only showing the transaction ID's etc as a proof of purchase and whatnots. If this kind of thing would be like what your concept is trying to imply, then I don't really want it. Let's not taint the blockchain technology reputation with these kinds of ideas.

[Storytellers]

Of course im in for the organ donation but the problem comes when you actually realise that its one to donate clothes or books etc. and its totally different thing to donate  something (without earning anything) that will never be replaced like an organ .At the same time its a crime to sell organs... Theres a mix of emotions going through everyone of our heads while discussing a subject like that and thats why its so interesting for me to read other peoples' opinion.
thanks

[habebe]

I have heard for a long time about organ donation, if it is legal, of course there are also legal and illegal because the others are used in the wrong way except for government donations, it is a good method so that it will not be difficult.  people seek organ donation, but we still need to be careful because I said that sometimes it is used in the wrong way many people sell their organs I know what is available they want to get rich, all over the world millions are in need  of the organ and sells it and others just donate to a government where it is legal.

[paxmao]

I think it's important to first learn how it's done these days to analyze the proposal. So I decided to read a bit about my country and some others, and here's what I learned: in Spain, there's a presumption of consent to become a donor after death, unless a person explicitly said they were against it. From what I read about the US, it's the opposite, but 54% of citizens sign agreements to become donors. Given that 95% support the idea in the US, I think what this country needs is simply the presumption of consent because it indeed makes sense where the vast majority supports it.
So it's already happening, and there are no financial incentives involved, no 'money upfront' or anything.
In my country, you can register as a potential donor in an event of your death, and there's no financial incentive to do this.
I'm not sure any country would provide a financial incentive for people to register, especially in the US, where 54% already registered.

I did not know that you were presumed a donor in Spain unless stated otherwise, but I guess it makes sense. Particularly in a country that is quite strong in organ transplants in general already for a few decades. I cannot help but to feel that this is kind of a "harvesting" by the public health system though.

In my view, and based on the studies, donating for money is an ultimate way of exploitation of the poor. Anyone with a little imagination can figure out how ugly this may get... e.g. selling children for their organs, giving organs away to avoid deprivation and hunger or extreme poverty... My take is that this is already happening in the black market, yet making it official is simply intolerable.